`

PICTURES: Anger over 'tonnes of mess' allegedly left inside huge Sheffield storage unit

The items at the unit.
The items at the unit.
0
Have your say

This is the huge pile of mess allegedly left behind at a storage unit by a tenant who was evicted from the site.

Tonnes of rubbish including about 40 stained mattresses, broken furniture, old TVs and even chopped down trees can be seen piled high in these images.

Inside the unit.

Inside the unit.

READ MORE: South Yorkshire's Barry Chuckle dies aged 73

The pictures were taken by the owner of a storage unit business in Neepsend who claims the mess was left behind by a tenant who they evicted for failing to pay rent who used the site as a "dumping ground."

She told how the tenant was a business which specialised in waste removal and garden clearance but they had failed to clear their own site after they were told to leave.

The business owner, who did not want to be identified, said she wanted to share the pictures to highlight how landlords must be careful about who they take on as tenants.

Mattresses and other items inside.

Mattresses and other items inside.

READ MORE: Thug spat at hospital security guard as nurses were trying to help him

She said: "There are even two chopped down trees in there including roots and soil, along with old food, clothes, stained mattresses, fridges, old televisions and general landfill.

"The rest of our tenants tend to be small companies and we tend not to have any trouble with them and enjoy a good relationship.

"He has used our unit as a dumping ground even though he claims to have a waste licence, has thrown our kindness back in our faces and left us with a big problem.

"We just want to warn other landlords to be careful when dealing with companies of this nature."

She added they are facing a large bill running into thousands of pounds to clear the site.

READ MORE: Fire at power station on outskirts of Sheffield

They have contacted a solicitor and are seeking advice to see if any legal action can be taken.

The Star has chosen not to name the tenant as they were not available for comment at the time of publishing.